Comparison of Breeding and Marketing Systems for Red Angus Cattle Using an Integrated Computer-Based Spreadsheet

Professional Animal Scientist, Oct 2004 by Miller, K E, Whittier, J C, Peel, R K, Enns, R M, Et al

The analysis provided information regarding trends in the data that suggested the two tails of the distribution were the same across all protocols. The middle portion of the distribution provides a relationship between the cost of a bull, semen, genetic change, and effectiveness of estrus detection. Estrous synchronization protocols where estrus detection was used are grouped by the cost of bull and semen. The protocols that used timed AI are grouped by cost of bull, semen, and genetic change. Trends suggested that in a system that uses estrus detection, costs of estrous synchronization can be overcome by genetic improvement. Trends in systems that use timed AI are driven by the costs of bull and semen, but genetic change provided the order of economic return from lowest to highest utilizing the changes in EPD from -20 to 20%.

The trends shown from the sensitivity analysis indicated purchase price of the bull became one of the key variables in the economic viability of the breeding program. In each case, the bull cost influenced the ranking of the net returns in all of the synchronization protocols; the influence of semen cost was more variable. In synchronization protocols that used estrus detection, ranking of net returns were based upon bull and semen cost. The protocols that used timed Al net returns were ranked based on bull and semen cost, and the genetic influence determined rank based on performance (-20 to 20%). In either case, a definite pattern occurs on both ends of the rank distribution and estrus detection or timed AI controlled the variation of the middle distribution. The sensitivity analysis indicated that the three variables selected for analysis do influence the net return to a production system.

Protocols that used heat detection differed by $40.94, and protocols that used TAI varied in differences from $42.69 to $41.94. The variation in difference is due to different AI success rates and protocols that incorporate some estrus detection prior to timed AI or calf removal, respectively. The trends continue in comparing all the retained ownership marketing scenarios. The differences ranged from $42.11 to $43.86 for fed cattle in protocols that use estrus detection or timed AI, respectively.

The development of the integrated computer-based spreadsheet enables users to compare breeding systems for economic impacts. The data suggest that a beef cattle operation that markets calves at weaning will need to be selective in the breeding system that will provide an economic benefit. The variability of marketing at weaning between natural service and Al provides evidence that marketing calves before the enhanced genetic potential is realized is a disadvantage to the calf producer. One caution should be observed when comparing the two systems: the net return in the spreadsheet only accounts for breeding expense. There are other expenses associated with cattle rearing that were assumed to stay constant.

The data from the economic sensitivity analysis provide information on the economic feasibility of unit cost of semen. The trends suggest that it is difficult for a commercial beef cattle operation, which sells calves at weaning, to purchase semen for a comparatively high cost of $25/unit. Additionally, purchasing semen at $20/ unit may be difficult to overcome, but, in some cases, the effectiveness of the synchronization protocol and the increase in genetic merit may offset the costs of the semen. The added production will provide a positive return to the operation. The AI cost ($15/unit of semen) is difficult to overcome with added production when the natural service sire was purchased for